Good morning. Good morning, good afternoon, and welcome to Kendrion's Capital Markets Day. Today, we will explain how Kendrion has transformed into a focused industrial motion and control specialist, why we have chosen the four specific secular growth markets, how Industrial Brakes and Industrial Actuators and Controls are positioned to benefit, and how this translates into our financial ambition. The common thread is simple. Our customers need motion that is safe, precise, and reliable, and they need it in markets where the demand for high-performance components is growing. Our strategy is to make full use of that opportunity, and we are keen to tell you the story. We will begin with an overview of Kendrion today and the strategic choices we have made. We will then discuss the market tailwinds and growth opportunities behind the four market segments of choice, robotics and automation, healthcare and med tech, energy and transmission infrastructure, and integrated industrial safety systems. Olaf and Robert will take you through Industrial Brakes and Industrial Actuators and Controls. They will discuss our products and the underlying technology and how this has translated into significant customer traction. Finally, Jeroen will cover ESG and our financial targets for 2027 to 2030. Of course, we finish with Q&A. Before we begin, let me briefly introduce today's presenters. I'm Joep van Beurden, Chief Executive, in my 11th year at Kendrion, and we have Jeroen Hemmen in his eighth year as our Chief Financial Officer and his 22nd year with the group. Olaf Detlef leads Industrial Brakes. Olaf has been Managing Director of Industrial Brakes since January 2025, following senior roles, including President of INTORQ and of Kendrion US and INTORQ China. Robert Lewin leads Industrial Actuators and Controls. He has been Managing Director of IAC since January 2013, when Kendrion bought Kuhnke, where he was in a similar role. One more point before we start. Please note the following cautionary statement. Certain statements contained in this presentation constitute forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements rely on several assumptions concerning future events and are subject to uncertainties and other factors, many of which are outside the company's control, that could cause actual results to differ materially from such statements. Let us turn to Kendrion today. This is the starting point for the story we want to share today. Kendrion is a focused industrial motion and control specialist. The following slides explain what that means in practice, where we play, why our position is differentiated, and why we believe we have selected attractive long-term growth markets. Let me describe the company we have become. Kendrion is a transformed industrial company with a focused position in motion and control. We specialize in actuation, fluid control, braking, and control electronics for demanding industrial applications. We focus on four carefully selected secular growth markets, robotics and automation, healthcare and med tech, energy and transmission infrastructure, and integrated industrial safety systems. Our products are typically mission-critical. This means that the cost of failure of our product for the customer is high, while our component price represents only a small share of the overall system cost. That combination creates a strong basis for value-based pricing, long customer relationships, and repeat business. Our position is supported by advanced intellectual property, deep application know-how, high-quality products, long cycle co-development with customers, and demanding regulatory certification. In short, we are not simply supplying components. We are helping customers to make their complex machines safer, more precise, and more reliable. This focus is reflected in our revenue base. Industrial Brakes and Industrial Actuators and Controls are both profitable businesses with their own technologies, customers, and growth opportunity. This slide is based on full year 2025 revenue. First, the two industrial businesses are roughly in balance when it comes to revenue. Second, excluding mobility, approximately 90% of industrial revenue is generated in our selected growth markets. The mobility activities are phasing out but remain generating cash until the activity ends. Jeroen will cover this later when we talk financials. Third, Kendrion is Europe-centric from a revenue customer and employee perspective. We have a strong presence in Germany and an important manufacturing and engineering base in Sibiu, Romania. This gives us a capable and cost-competitive platform from which to serve global customers. The result is a focused portfolio, two growing industrial businesses supported by a cash-generative mobility tail that is being managed down in a disciplined and profitable way. The portfolio reflects a strategic pivot that is now complete. I will now spend some time on our application segments of choice and the secular growth opportunities they represent. Our choice for these markets is built around long-term market needs rather than short-term cycles. Across all four segments, customers are asking for more precision, more safety, higher reliability, and improved efficiency. Those requirements play directly to Kendrion's technology and engineering strength. Let us look at the four segments and the specific opportunities they create. We have aligned our product portfolio and our commercial focus around these four markets. Robotics and automation is our largest selected segment at approximately EUR 120 million of 2025 revenue. Growth is driven by long-term trends we expect to persist. Digitalization and AI, labor shortages in combination with rising labor costs in Europe and the U.S., and the reshoring of supply chains all point to the need for more industrial automation. Healthcare and MedTech contributed approximately EUR 20 million in 2025. Its structural drivers include an aging global population, shortages of healthcare professionals, and the use of AI in personalized medicine and diagnostics. Energy and transmission infrastructure contributed approximately EUR 25 million. The global shift towards electrification is creating unprecedented demand for power, driven in part by data centers, AI compute, and electrification of transport. This is increasing the need for high-performance components in generation, transmission, and distribution. Integrated industrial safety systems contributed approximately EUR 30 million in 2025, and as machines interact more closely with people, customers need reliable safety control electronics and high-precision components that meet increasingly strict regulatory requirements. These are not four unrelated markets. They share customers who demand mission-critical performance, predictable qualification, and dependable engineering skills. I will drill down on all four, starting with robotics and automation. The robot market has evolved through several generations, from the first AGVs in the 1970s to industrial robots in the 2000s, cobots in the 2010s, composite robots in 2020s, and recently, humanoid robots. More autonomy and closer interaction with people increase the need for fail-safe braking, precise positioning, embedded safety, and reliable control. As we move across this spectrum, three things happen at the same time. One, the number of robots increases. Two, the number of brakes and actuators per robot increases. Three, the performance requirements for each component rise. Three developments that are independent, and they all point to growth. We see this in the form of many opportunities in our pipeline, and we expect that to continue for many years. Today, Kendrion supplies products into all the main robot categories shown here, and these include spring-applied holding brakes, permanent magnet, high torque line brakes, safety PLCs, bistable solenoids, magnet finger grippers, and sensor-less control solutions. Longer-term, humanoid robots present additional potential, particularly for safety brakes, actuators in joints, and compact control electronics. This opportunity is supported by several independent long-term catalysts. Robotics and automation are being driven by more than one cycle. Three structural forces are all moving in the same direction. First, digitalization and AI are transforming manufacturing. The long-term endpoint: intelligent machines that can sense, decide, and act in the physical world. Second, labor shortages and rising labor costs are making automation economically necessary. The working-age population is expected to decline by approximately 10%-15% in many economies, while labor costs are expected to rise materially. Third, around 80% of Western companies are reshoring or considering reshoring activities as geopolitical uncertainty increases. As you know, Kendrion is part of that trend. We've been moving towards local for local for the past 10 years. These drivers are independent. They are not simply different ways of describing the same cycle. As a result, you can see a clear inflection point in the graph at the bottom of this slide. Global factory automation has grown with around 6% per year between 2019 and 2024, and going forward, that growth is expected to double to around 12% per year. Product requirements are demanding. Our brakes and other components must deliver precision, safety, reliability, and efficiency, all areas in which we excel. These three structural growth trends drive concrete opportunities in servo motors, warehouses, and factories. This slide describes four distinct subcategories, subsegments of robotics and automation that are a concrete reflection of the growth opportunity in factory automation that we just discussed. First, servomotors. A servomotor, and there's actually a couple of examples over there, is an electric motor that uses feedback control to deliver precise, fast, and repeatable movement in automated equipment. More automation, more servomotors. It typically needs an integrated and compact brake of high quality. So it's not a surprise that the global servo market is expected to grow from around EUR 15 billion in 2025 to EUR 21 billion in 2030, or around 7% annually. Kendrion supplies compact, high torque, and high precision permanent magnet brakes integrated into servomotors. Next, intralogistics. We're talking about AGVs, forklift trucks, and pallet trucks. In many of these automated vehicles, the brake is a safety component. There is no driver to override a failure. Quality and reliability are therefore key. Intralogistics is expected to grow globally from around EUR 70 billion to EUR 110 billion, or around 10% annually, supported by e-commerce, distribution centers, and dense high-rise warehousing. The market for forklift trucks is expected to grow even faster from approximately EUR 70 billion to EUR 130 billion or around 13% annually. Our products include brakes for pallet trucks, counterbalance forklifts, and other high-torque applications. Finally, industrial machinery. It's a broad and diverse market with opportunities for both Industrial Brakes and Industrial Actuators and Controls. It is the largest market shown, growing from approximately EUR 620 billion to EUR 850 billion, or around 7% annually. As in all of these markets, focus is key. We select customers and applications where our technology is critical, the qualification process matters, and our high performance is valued. We move to healthcare and MedTech. Like robotics and automation, healthcare has powerful and structural tailwinds, an aging population, shortages of specialist medical labor, and the increased interest in personalized medicine and advanced diagnostics enabled by AI. Within healthcare and MedTech, we focus on two niches. Medical fluid control on this slide, and surgical robotics on the next. Medical fluid control includes dental water and air supply units, our so-called Power Pinch Valves for kidney dialysis, and biocompatible pressure regulators for anesthesia and other applications. These are mission-critical products. They must meet stringent quality and regulatory requirements, and many are produced in biological clean room environments. The qualification and approval cycles are long. That will, of course, slow down the start of production, but it also reinforces the position of established suppliers that have earned the required approval and customer trust. We are such an established supplier. The fluid management system market is expected to grow from approximately EUR 14 billion in 2025 to EUR 23 billion, representing roughly 13% annual growth on a global scale. For valves, this is even faster at a CAGR of around 17%. Our second healthcare niche is surgical robotics. The global surgical robot market is expected to grow from approximately EUR 14 billion in 2025 to EUR 24 billion in 2029, representing around 15% annual growth. Robotic surgery systems are proliferating across orthopedics, neurosurgery, endovascular procedures, and other specialist applications. These minimally invasive procedures can improve patient outcomes, while better ergonomics help extend the working life of surgeons. The requirements are demanding. The brake must hold exactly where the surgeon has positioned the instrument without drift, without backlash, and must remain fail-safe under all circumstances, including a power failure. Our products include classic permanent magnet brakes for secure holding and high torque permanent magnet brakes for precise surgical microscope positioning, and in some case, also spring-applied brakes. Wrong picture. Wrong picture. No. No. Is it? Hold on, guys. I'm sorry. Where am I? This is it. All right. There we go. I'm sorry, guys. Let me recoup this. Yes. All right. I'll start again. The global surgical robot market is expected to grow from approximately EUR 14 billion in 2025 to EUR 24 billion in 2029, representing approximately 15% annual growth. Robotic surgery systems are proliferating across orthopedics, neurosurgery, endovascular procedures, and other specialist applications. These minimally invasive procedures can improve patient outcomes while better ergonomics help extend the working life of surgeons. The requirements are demanding. The brake must hold exactly where the surgeon has positioned the instrument without drift or backlash, and must remain fail-safe under all circumstances, including a power failure. Our products include classical permanent magnet brakes for secure holding and high torque permanent magnet brakes for precise surgical microscope positioning, and in some cases, also spring-applied brakes. The qualification cycle is a significant moat. We are involved during the design phase, often well before revenue starts. Once a product is qualified and embedded in a regulated system, a customer is unlikely to re-qualify a competing component. Next, energy and transmission infrastructure. Modernizing the transmission grid and scaling nuclear, solar, and wind power are essential to the global shift towards electrification. They are also critical to enable the growth of data centers, AI compute, and electrical vehicles. The global transmission grid market is expected to grow at approximately 7% annually, from around EUR 320 billion to EUR 580 billion between 2025 and 2034. The drivers are clear. Rapidly increasing electricity demand, aging grids, the integration of renewable generation, interconnection bottlenecks that are creating congestion and increasing the need for smart and resilient infrastructure. Kendrion's position is specific and important. We supply electromagnetic trip coils and release components for high-voltage circuit breakers. These components may remain idle for years, but when a fault occurs, they must open the circuit breaker in milliseconds. Failure can result in equipment damage, fire, or a cascading outage. It is a long-cycle market in which our component is a small part relative to the investment of the system, but critical to its safe operation and subject to demanding qualification requirements. In other words, you heard it before, mission-critical. The same characteristics, long cycles, high consequence of failure, and demanding qualification are visible in wind infrastructure. Wind is another key component in expanding the global energy infrastructure. Rising electricity demand increases the need for new power generation, while policy and economics continue to support the expansion of wind. The graph shows global annual wind capacity additions growing at approximately 8% between 2024 and 2030. Excluding China, this number is approximately 13%. The regional growth rates shown are especially strong in EMEA with 14%, and APAC, excluding China, with 20%. Kendrion supplies brakes for three key positions in a wind turbine. The yaw drive that turns the turbine into the wind, the so-called pitch system that angles the blades, and brakes for the internal elevator to get to the nacelle, the engine room at the top of the turbine. Larger and more efficient turbines require higher torque and larger brakes. So like in robotics, that creates growth in more dimensions, more turbines, and more content per turbine. Our technology is therefore exposed not only to the number of turbines installed, but also to the increasing performance requirements of each of them. The last selected market is integrated industrial safety system, which we view as the foundation for autonomous automation and robots. Safety is a primary catalyst for industrial automation and especially for automation that interacts with humans. The trend extends from heavy manufacturing and logistics to appliances and other equipment that increasingly operate with limited human intervention. The global industrial safety market is expected to grow at approximately 7% annually. The quality of that growth is particularly attractive because safety cannot be deferred. A machine builder cannot ship without meeting the applicable requirements. Regulation is therefore a growth driver, and that is moving forward as well. The EU Machinery Regulation 2023/1230 raises safety requirements, while cybersecurity is increasingly part of the safety obligations for network-controlled components such as locks. Kendrion addresses the market in two ways. Electronically, we provide safety PLCs, safety I/O modules, and related control solutions, and physically, we provide locking mechanisms, solenoid door locks, and other locking solenoids. These products serve applications including commercial washing machines, parcel lockers, fire protection systems, automated guided vehicles, and industrial robots. The common requirement is uncompromising reliability. Safety is not an optional feature added after the machine has been designed. It is embedded in the architecture from the beginning. Let me summarize the opportunity before we move to the two business groups. As you will have gathered, Kendrion is not dependent on a single market or a single short-term cycle. We are focused on four segments, and each presents us with a solid growth opportunity for the next decade or even longer. Robotics and automation has an estimated average growth rate of approximately 8%. Energy and transmission infrastructure is also around 8%. Healthcare and MedTech is the fastest growing selected market at approximately 14%, while integrated industrial safety is expected to grow at around 7%. More important than any individual forecast is the common quality of the forecasted growth. Customers need precision, safety, reliability, and efficiency in applications where failure is costly and qualification matters. We are already supplying products into these markets with these high standards, and our opportunity is to deepen our position customer- by- customer, application- by- application, and project- by- project. This is the foundation for the next part of the presentation, how Industrial Brakes and Industrial Actuators and Controls are positioned to capture these opportunities and convert them into profitable growth. Before we go to that, I want to preempt a question you may have looking at the summary slide. These are attractive growth numbers on the slide for the segments we are focused on, 7% for safety, 8% for robotics and energy, 14% for MedTech. So why do we expect our growth for the coming years between 5% and 8%? Two points on this. First, the trends fueling the growth are relatively recent. We talked, for instance, about an inflection point in factory automation, where growth is expected to double over the coming years. This means that initially, growth is visible in our project pipeline and in the forecast that our customers give us for the ramp of these projects. That is happening. To turn projects into revenue takes time. We are beginning to see shipping the early projects, but for everything, for instance, added over the past year, the revenue will follow a little bit later. The second point is that our guidance is not a top-down estimate based on the market opportunity. It is based on a detailed bottom-up analysis of all the projects in the pipeline today, where we assess the timing and the volumes of the production ramp. So it is grounded in our actual pipeline and our expectation when projects will ramp. Jeroen is also going to discuss this in a little bit more detail in the financial section. So let us turn to the business groups, starting with Industrial Brakes. Olaf? All right. Yes, good afternoon. My name is Olaf Detlef, and I run the Industrial Brakes business group. Let me start with a question. Does Industrial Brakes wait for the market to tell us what to build, or are we there first? For years, this business grew with its customers. Strong customers served well. That is a good business, and it is still a large part of what we do. But it means somebody else picks the direction. We change the order. The application we go after now is our choice. The next 20 minutes, I will show you four products. All four of them were designed before a customer had written a requirement down. So about 430 people, four plants, Villingen and Aerzen in Germany, Atlanta, U.S., and India, Pune. All four of them build brakes. We have no separate head office, and we have no pure sell site. The people who sell it sit next to the people who build. Revenue this year is expected about EUR 100 million. The two German plants carry most of that revenue, and they carry out development. Atlanta and Pune are smaller, and they are because our customers build motors and robots on those continents. Being close matters for supply, for qualification, and support. One number on this page matters. 35 of those 430 people work in R&D, and almost everything I am going to show you today came out of that group. IB in 2026. Three numbers for the first half of this year. Revenue, EUR 51.5 million, up 8%. Added value margin, 54.5%, and 1.3 points better than the full year 2025. Active business opportunities, 224. Two years ago, there were 96. The first two numbers are the results. The third one is a reason, and I will come back to it later. Now, let me say why this matters. Every machine that moves has to stop. A robot arm, surgical instrument, a vehicle in a warehouse. The more a machine decides for itself, the more it has to stop safely. Not in a normal case, in a worst case, when the power fails, when the software fails. Software decides when to stop. The stopping itself is hardware, and that is our business. Growth no longer depends on key accounts alone. Serving that demand is not the same as shaping it. Let me start with what we changed. Three things, and all three on purpose. The first one was key account management. Our sales work was built around our largest customer. We looked after them. We grew with them when they grew, and when they slowed down, so did we. Key account management is a subscription to the market average. We canceled it. Today, we have four teams that cut across the company: sales, engineering, marketing, and product management. Each of them spend a quarter of their working time on this. With one shared team, day every week and a review every quarter. The second change was a target system. Sales and engineering had separate goals, separate funnels. Today, they have one. Marketing and sales develop the lead together, and there is no handover. Every lead has an owner from the first day. The third change was a portfolio. We stopped series that we did not earn their keep, and we stopped giving flat discounts. Price now follows quantity, and we moved the weight of our development towards application where the brake has to do something special. Industrial Brakes pipeline has more than doubled since end of 2024, and there is what came out of it. Two years ago, we had 96 active opportunities. Today, we have 224, up about 130%. The same people and more than twice as many chances. An opportunity for us is not a hope. We know the application, we know who decides, and we have a technical solution for it. 72% of them sit in robotics and automation, 16% in energy and transmission, 12% in healthcare, safety, and everything else. Did we just count more loosely? No. The definition did not move. What moved is who is doing the looking. Now it is four mixed teams hunting for application, including at companies that have never bought anything from us before. The funnel is graded, not counted. Qualified means three conditions at the same time. We know the whole buying group, not just one contact. The technical feasibility is settled, and we and the customer have a shared price expectation. Otherwise, it does not count as qualified. It is not revenue and not a promise. It is the size of the field we are playing on. One more thing before you have asked for it. 72% in a single field is a concentration, and I would rather name it myself. It is a bet on a field, not a bet on a project. It is spread over servomotors, robot joints, the drive of warehouse vehicles and intralogistic, and no single project dominates. It is also the fastest-growing field we serve. Not being concentrated there would be a decision that needs explaining. Why the margin improved and why it holds. Now the margin. Because a move like this always raises the same doubt. Was it the market, or was it us? Our added value margin went from 53.2% in 2025 to 54.5% in the first half this year. Three things did it, and all three were counted before the margin moved. Pricing. We adjusted prices, and we passed on material surcharges. That sounds simple, it is not. In a market where everybody expects last year's price. Purchasing. We relocated and localized components, and we improved our terms. Portfolio. We phased out products that no longer earned enough. In several cases, the decision made itself. Sourcing parts for the older design had become harder every year. We replaced that revenue with new business at better margin. This was not a cycle. Each of three was a decision. Cost taken out by design, not by discount. That is what we changed. Now, four pieces of evidence that we are early. The first one is a servo brake. A servo motor drives the machine axis, a robot arm, a machine tool, a conveyor. Inside that motor sits a brake and holds the axis when the power goes off. It is a large market and a hard one. Everybody builds one, and in a commodity business like this, the pressure on price never lets up. The usual answer to that is discount. Ours was a redesign. We built a new magnetic circuit and used a different kind of magnet. The result is a brake that is 30% shorter and has 40% fewer parts. Fewer parts means lower cost, up to 20% lower, with the same performance and the same safety standards. It fits 70% of the application we aim at, and it uses the same interface as our larger line. A customer can change size without changing the design. For the customer, the brake cost 15%-20% less. That sounds like we are giving something away, but it is the opposite. The brake is about 20%-30% what a servo motor costs. A cheaper brake takes 5%-7% off the price of the whole motor. In a market where motors compete on price, 5%-7% decides who gets designed in. We took cost out by design, not by discount, and the pattern came through 6 months ahead of plan. Hollow shafts brake for advanced cobot joints. The second one is a brake for the joint of a cobot, a robot that works next to people rather than behind a fence. Those joints have a problem. The cables for power and for sensors run through the middle of the joints. Every part inside that joint needs an opening in the center, and it has to be flat because the space is tight. A standard brake is solid in the center and is not flat. We built one that is both. The largest hollow shaft we could achieve in the finest, tiniest housing we could build. We built it before the requirement existed really on paper. There were signals from customers' conversation, but nobody had written it down. It came out of our own advanced development. This market is young, and the technical standards are still being set. Arrive after they are set, and you are building to someone else's drawing. This one is developed that sells into two markets. This is a big advantage. The same design goes into the wheel drive or warehouse vehicles. Different industry, different customers, but the same product. We did not build a cobot brake and then look for a second use. We built one product for the way these joints and these drives were actually designed and both markets need it. In neurosurgery, half a degree is not a tolerance. The third one is medical. Think about an operation on the brain. The instrument is held in place by a robot arm, and inside that arm is one of our brakes. If that brake allows half a degree of rotation while it is holding, the tip of the instrument moves. Not much, but in that operation, not much may be a serious issue. A permanent magnet brake has zero rotational play. On this slide are five requirements a designer works through for a device like that. No movement when the brake holds. No force left over on the vertical axis when it opens. Enough holding force in a space the size of a finger joint. Quiet, because it is an operating room. Safe for the whole life of the device, not only when it is new. This is not a description of something we still have to build. Those requirements are met by series that we already have in the market. Here is why I am showing them to you. A list like that is not settled in the purchasing round. It is settled in engineering, years before the first unit ships. Once it is settled, the brake is a part of the approval of the device, and this is a big advantage. We have been in serious production in the field for a while with smaller projects. This year is the first one at the scale that matters. Three of the largest makers of this system have designed us in, and about 10 are in talks. IE5 is not just an efficiency class. It is a different motor. The fourth one is about change in the rules. Electric motors are the largest single consumer of electricity in industry. That is why the European Union keeps raising the minimum efficiency. IE3 became mandatory in 2021, IE4 in 2023, and in 2025, the highest class, IE5, entered the international standard. IE5 is usually shown as one of more step on a ladder. It is not. An IE5 motor is a different motor. It is a synchronous motor. Our proven standard brake does not fit it, not even as a variant. The housing is new, and the mounting situation is also new. We have finished the concept phase, and we are building prototypes. A pilot customer is testing the high-torque version, and the feedback is strong. Power density is up 30%. It is easier to mount, and we took cost out of the design at the same time. Now, the timing. The rule is in place, the installed base is not. In 2022, IE4 was still under 4% of the European motor sales, and now we speak about standard. The volume is in front of us, not behind us. We are not ahead of the standard. We are ahead of the volume. That is the difference, and this is the point of the whole presentation. Three technology fields, eight new products by 2030. So where does that leave us against the competition? There are two ways to build an electromagnetic brake. Permanent magnets or spring-applied. And there were two places to put on, inside the motor or along the drive chain. That looks like four fields. In practice, there are only three. A permanent magnetic brake is always built into a motor. We are in all three fields with products in the markets. And in all three, something new is coming, eight new products by 2030. Most of those eight are not in the market yet, and I will not pretend otherwise. The first three sizes of the new servo brake, what I spoke before, are selling today. The rest are in development and nothing counts for us until its business case is approved. The business does not rest on those eight away. 224 active opportunities are mainly served with the products that we have today. Now, the structure of the competition, and I will not name anyone from this stage. This largest supplier by volume carries no permanent magnet brake at all. That comes from our own study of 40 manufacturers that we made in June. What this means for a customer is simple. They can change the brake technology without changing the vendor. We see ourself as a leading brake manufacturer with the broadest product range in the field. Strategic summary. Let me put whole thing in one place. Software decides when to stop. The stopping itself is hardware, and that is our business. Four markets drive us, robots and cobots, surgical robotics, a new generation of efficient motors, and warehouse automation. In all four, the position is one, in the design phase and not in the price list. Usually, before the customer has written the requirement down. We will grow faster than our markets by choosing our segments ourself instead of following our largest customers. The improvement in profitability was decided, not cyclical. I started with a question, does Industrial Brakes wait for the market or are we there first? You have seen four answers. A servo brake was redesigned instead of discounted. A cobot brake built before the requirement existed. A medical brake was settled in engineering years before the first unit shipped. A brake for a motor generation that has not ramped up yet. None of this won on price. It was won early. Thank you. Good afternoon. My name is Robert Lewin. I have the pleasure to guide you through Industrial Actuators and Controls, in brief, IAC. In recent years, IAC was consolidating invest costs and efforts to improve competitiveness and profitability, but concurrently, we developed several business strategies to increase growth potential in interesting markets. Interesting, in our sense, are markets where higher average profitability and increasing demand and higher economical resilience might be assumed. Although this picture looks quite German-centered, you need to take into account that 90% of our deliveries ending up outside of Germany directly via export or indirectly via our exporting customers. We serve approximately 12,000 customers. It starts with product from EUR 10 and it might go up to almost EUR 10 million per revenue per year per customer. In the U.S., we were able to double our revenues in the past five years. Since two years, we are targeting three larger markets in Asia, which is Korea, Japan, and India, and first projects and revenues have already been generated. In first half year of 2026, we needed to adjust production capacity in our German and Romanian facilities due to higher demand. That takes us usually three to six months because of supplier dependencies. Concurrently, one of our major customers was undergoing a major restructuring, resulting in a decline of order inflow to us. This is the only reason why we cannot show 8% in the first half year in the numbers. IAC's specific go-to market model is worth some explanations. Since several years, we transformed this company part from standard solenoid and controls manufacturer into a very specific product application-oriented company. All product strategies are based on through internal market research, discussed and validated by cross-functional teams from sales, R&D, management, and marketing, and executed in campaigns by our marketing and sales support team. With the right business case proposal, we can apply for feasibility studies, investment sharing, and of course, we can ask our customers for attractive pricing. Yes, we did improve the number of opportunities, but more important is the quality of our opportunities. In other words, high probability to win these opportunities at attractive pricing. Therefore, we focus on growing markets where investments are available and more dynamic developments are visible to improve the business situation. The markets are relatively conservative, and a supplier will not be changed without a reason. We need to provide significant improvements in quality, service, or costs to be interesting. The following slides will show you our main market activities and explain our application and products. Also here, the first market is robotics and automation, where beside the classical machinery automation, more applications for our products came up, such as AGVs, robots, automatic warehouses, where our products are in need. We are addressing the demand for lower power consumption, reacting on new regulations, and provide possibilities to remove air-powered actuators. The first example I brought along is the Shuttle Finger Solenoid, where we are actually replacing existing motor-based solutions in warehouses. Why? Our total cost of ownership is lower than the competitive solution. Less power consumption and lower costs for electronic drives enabled the business. In the meantime, the patented product is sold to several European countries and the U.S. and Korea. The second sample is our new motion controller, where we explicitly addressed the transformation to more battery-powered tools, machines, and vehicles. The robust design allows operation in rough environment, and the control software allows longer battery running cycles and manages alternating load requirements. In healthcare and MedTech, the high number of pipeline opportunities is showing a high market dynamic, which is mainly caused by the new medical device regulations in Europe. Similar to the FDA in the U.S., the European Union is building up its own regulatory framework where all supplier need to integrate this. This means medical-graded material, clean room production, traceability, and documentation requirements, where most probably not all of current competition will follow. Especially in applications interacting with human body, like dialysis or respiration, the requirements are more demanding. This is the Power Pinch Valve, which is designed for high force and high safety applications, and often in little space to be integrated. Deep application know-how allowed us to develop the product specifically to customer needs, but also standardized with a certain degree of customization when necessary. Energy transition is, especially in Europe, a more and more important topic. Since we not only transform to use electrical machines and vehicles, we also need to react faster on geopolitical changes, which are making energy in Europe more expensive. There are several possibilities to react on this, but certainly, a recommended one is to consume less energy by using more energy-efficient solutions. Our inductive heating solution with up to 97% efficiency is definitely a way to save larger amounts of power in comparison to still used steam or oil-heated solutions. To translate that into safeties, we can save on average 50% of the energy, sometimes even more. We support our customer to achieve their transition to lower operating costs with a high range of inductors, the heating element, which can be adapted in size and form to address the current machinery shape. The power of our modular generators and systems range from 1 kW up to several megawatts. With that, we can address a broader market from laundry, industrial dryers, to automated cooking and other food processing applications. The last of the market segments is safety equipment. For years, we are serving holding magnets for fire protection doors, mainly in the DACH region, where higher quality standards are required to meet the VdS regulation standards. Other countries can actually live well with lower requirements, which is resulting in lower costs and more competition. Our new solution is developed in the U.S. and will especially address the U.S. market, but it can also address other interesting European markets like Scandinavia and the Netherlands. The complete new design will allow lower costs and easy-to-implement functionality. However, also in this case, FM Global regulations need to be addressed in order to be successful with the product. Let me briefly summarize what we are doing. At IAC, it is always crucial to find the right product market mix. That needs through internal market investigations, we are doing that quite professional. We can compensate our cost increases with higher pricing. In the current inflationary environment, we are doing quite well. The growth potential we are creating step- by- step, more and more in this dedicated market, which we are following with discipline. Yes, I would say we have quite an advanced marketing and sales process, which runs very efficiently with new products in new markets. That is our strength that we can explore that quite quickly and successfully. Thank you for your attention. Thank you, Robert. Good afternoon, everyone. My name is Jeroen Hemmen. I will take you through our ESG program and the financial framework. Let me first summarize the main elements of our current ESG program. Our focus is on three areas, further reducing our environmental footprint, strengthening diversity and employee engagement, and embedding ESG more deeply into how we manage our business and supply chain. The key message here is that we have made solid progress, particularly on emission and reporting, and at the same time, strengthening diversity and the remaining emission reductions require continued attention. On the emission side, we have already achieved substantial reduction in carbon emissions. There we go. Around 60% of the reduction was realized before the start of the current program in 2024. The target has been further accelerated by the divestments of automotive and China. As a result, the remaining reduction target has been recalibrated to 12%, which is a more challenging final step as most opportunities have been captured already over the past 10 years. By now, 92% of our electricity comes from renewable sources. On the social agenda, progress on gender and diversity has been slower than intended. We have therefore established an action plan to accelerate our ambitions, and strengthen our diversity and inclusion initiatives. Employee engagement is an important part of this. The 2025 employee survey showed positive results, and we have implemented follow-up actions based on the feedback. From a governance perspective, ESG has become part of our normal business practices. We have introduced an ESG supplier questionnaire and secured formal commitments to our supplier code of conduct, and this has helped us to address sustainability, not only within our own operations, but also across our supply chain. We also have further improved our EcoVadis and CDP ratings. Looking ahead, our priorities are clear. Environmentally, we will continue to pursue the remaining carbon reductions. Socially, we will focus on accelerating diversity and inclusion and maintaining an active employee dialogue. From a governance perspective, we aim to cover 80% of our annual purchasing volume through the supplier code of conduct while maintaining our current sustainability ratings. Overall, ESG continues to be embedded in how we operate, manage risk, and create long-term value. Then to the financial framework. In this section, I will focus on the financial framework and how we intend to create value over the next phase of Kendrion's development. I will make four points. The first point is we are on track to deliver the financial commitments made in the 2024 Capital Markets Day ahead of schedule. Two, the financial quality of the business is improving. Profitability and returns have moved higher. Three, industrial growth is becoming the primary value driver, which gives us the confidence that future growth can translate into expanding margins. Four, we will combine growth with financial discipline. The mobility ramp down remains cash generative. M&A is an optional upside, and excess capital will be returned when investment needs and our leverage ratio allow. Our destination is clear, achieving between 5% and 8% industrial growth, an EBITDA margin between 17% and 20%, and at least 100% cash conversion of net profit over the 2027 and 2030 target period. At the 2024 Capital Markets Day, we set out clear financial targets. We expected annual growth between 5% and 8%, an EBITDA margin between 15% and 18% as from 2025, and a return on invested capital excluding goodwill between 23% and 27% as from 2027. We also committed to return at least 50% of normalized net profit to our shareholders as dividend. The performance indicators over the past 12 months demonstrate that we are progressing well. The recovery in growth is picking up, with the last 12 months growth at approximately 4%. This is not yet between the 5% and 8% expectation, but the underlying direction is positive as end markets recover and the industrial pipeline converts into revenue. Profitability is already well within the previous target range, with an EBITDA margin of 16.4% when measured over the last 12 months. Return on invested capital excluding goodwill is 26.3%, which is at the upper end of the range and ahead of our 2027 timing. We have also maintained our commitment to shareholder returns. In 2026, for example, 59% of net profit was paid out. These results provide a strong starting point for the next phase. We are now setting our next target framework between 5% and 8% industrial growth, a 17%-20% group EBITDA margin, and at least 100% cash conversion of net profit. The key point is that this reflects the next step in our ambitions, built on a stronger profitability. This slide shows the progression from 2024 through the last 12 months. Revenue has slightly increased from EUR 245 million in 2024 to almost EUR 251 million on the last 12 months basis. But more importantly, the quality of this revenue is improving. The EBITDA margin has increased from 13.4% to 15.5%, and then to 16.4%. That is a three percentage points improvement in a relatively short period in what can be considered quite difficult market circumstances. Return on invested capital excluding goodwill has risen from 12% via 24.6%, and then to 26.3%. This reflects the improvement in earnings, the disciplined use of capital, and of course, the automotive and China divestments. The conclusion is important. We are not simply growing revenue. We are building a business that converts growth into higher profitability and stronger returns. The next question is how we will sustain that quality of growth. The answer is a disciplined approach to where we invest and which projects we pursue. Our growth strategy is selective. We are focusing on three elements. First, we are targeting attractive growth markets. These markets benefit from structural trends that are likely to persist. Labor scarcity, reshoring, the adoption of AI, an aging population, increasing safety requirements, electrification, and grid renewal. Second, we focus on mission-critical products. The product needs to be critical to the customer's application, differentiated through IP or knowhow, and positioned where failure has a high cost for the customer. Third, we apply financial discipline to each and every new project. The project must meet clear hurdles, including a fully costed EBITDA margin of at least 20%, a lifetime return on invested capital of at least 25%, and growth potential of at least 10%. In addition, we demand meaningful customer commitments through co-investments or risk-sharing. This discipline is particularly relevant when we look at the changing mix between Industrial and Mobility. Industrial revenue growth will drive disproportionate EBITDA growth. We are targeting 5% to 8% annual Industrial growth, with opportunities across robotics and automation, energy, MedTech, and integrated safety. The growth ranges shown on the slide reflect our pipeline. Approximately 5% to 8% in robotics and automation, 5% to 8% in energy, 3% to 5% in integrated safety, and 10% to 12% in MedTech. This is all based on our bottom-up financial plan, as you explained. At the same time, Mobility is expected to run off by approximately EUR 25 million of revenue over around five years, so roughly EUR 5 million per year. Industrial growth is expected to run well ahead of cost growth, and the new Industrial project mix carries higher margins. That creates strong operating leverage and supports expansion of the Industrial EBITDA margin. At the same time, Mobility will remain a profitable part of the financial story during the ramp down and targeted to remain well above the 15% EBITDA margin. Our cooperation with Knorr-Bremse supports sustainable margins and positive cash flow. Therefore, the group EBITDA margin can expand even as Mobility revenue decreases. The Industrial mix more than offsets the runoff over time, while the cash profile of Mobility remains supportive during the transition. Let me explain in a little bit more detail why the Mobility runoff does not create a cash flow cliff. The Mobility revenue decrease is by our strategic choice. It reflects the planned ramp down of the activity and the cooperation with Knorr-Bremse. The important point here is that revenue runoff is not the same as cash flow runoff. First, the activity remains profitable throughout the ramp down. And second, the variable cost structure preserves cash flow as revenue declines. The cost base adjusts with the activity, which supports EBITDA resilience. Third, investment needs are very limited as the activity winds down, supporting EBITDA to cash conversion. Taken together, these factors means that the cash contribution remains positive throughout the illustrated period. The Mobility business therefore helps to fund the business, while Industrial is the larger long-term growth contributor. With organic growth as the base, we also have the option to accelerate our strategy through targeted M&A. Organic growth is the foundation of our strategy. M&A is an opportunity to add upside, but not a requirement for our strategy to work. We have a scalable Industrial platform, a healthy balance sheet, and a target field for bolt-on acquisitions. We are looking for businesses that are mission-critical and differentiated in motion control, where the product has a high cost of failure, but represents a relatively small share of the customer system cost. Our acquisition criteria are equally clear. We want innovation capability and technology that complements Kendrion's existing portfolio. We need clear and credible synergies that support the purchase price, and we look for strong management teams and a good cultural fit. Any transaction must offer returns above the available alternatives. This means that organic investments or shareholder returns remain a valid use of capital if an acquisition does not meet these hurdles. The next slide shows the margin development, both from the perspective of the historical proof points and the directional bridge towards 2030. Historically, the EBITDA margin increased from 13.4% in 2024 to 16.4% on a last 12 months basis, and that is a net expansion of three percentage points. The forward bridge indicates further expansion potential. The main positive contributor is expected to be Industrial operating leverage. As Industrial revenue grows faster than the associated cost base, the incremental margin improves. The second positive contributor is the sales mix. A larger share of higher margin Industrial activities increases the group added value margin. There is also an offset from some operating deleverage associated with the Mobility runoff. However, this effect is expected to be more than offset by the Industrial leverage and positive mix shift. The resulting direction is a group EBITDA margin improving towards the higher end of the target range by 2030. This is the core financial logic of the strategy. Revenue growth ahead of incremental cost growth, combined with a higher value mix. We translate that logic into a transparent financial model on the next slide. The financial model provides the building blocks behind the margin ambition. On the last 12 months basis, revenue and other operating income were EUR 256 million. By 2030, the organic target range is between EUR 278 million and EUR 310 million. The added value margin is expected to increase from 58.8% to approximately 60%. This reflects the positive industrial mix and the focus on higher value applications. Direct staff costs are expected to remain broadly stable at approximately 12% of revenue, while the indirect staff costs will reduce from 21.3% towards a range between 19% and 21%. Other operating expenses are expected to improve to approximately 7.5%-8.5% of revenue. Capital investments are expected to remain disciplined at around 4% of revenue, and therefore below the level of depreciation in the model. This supports cash conversion. The key drivers are clear. Industrial growth of 5%-8% compounds over time and progressively compensates for the mobility runoff. Growth ahead of incremental cost growth creates operating leverage. The positive mix increases the added value margin. Disciplined CapEx supports cash generation. Strong cash generation gives us the flexibility, but we will remain disciplined on how we deploy that cash. Our capital allocation principle is simple. High return growth comes first, financial resilience and shareholder returns follow. We will reinvest in organic growth where the expected return is attractive. The internal hurdle for CapEx is at least 25%, and we target at least 14% return on invested capital through the cycle when including goodwill, so M&A. We intend to maintain balance sheet flexibility with a target EBITDA leverage range between one and two times EBITDA. This provides resilience through the cycle while preserving the ability to act when an M&A opportunity arises. An active strategy lever is temporary leverage above two times EBITDA for value creating M&A, provided that the transaction is compelling and that the path back to our target leverage is clear. At the same time, capital will be returned to shareholders when investment needs and leverage allows. This can be through dividends and where appropriate, share buybacks. The framework balances three objectives: fund organic growth, retain strategic flexibility for targeted M&A, and return excess cash to shareholders. Let me now turn to the mechanism for returning capital. Our dividend framework provides a clear baseline for shareholder returns. We target a minimum payout of 50% of normalized net profit before amortization. This establishes a dependable cash return while preserving the capacity to invest in the business and maintain balance sheet flexibility. Share buybacks are also part of the capital allocation agenda. They will be considered when investment needs are covered and leverage remains at the lower end of the range. The principle is therefore consistent. Dividends provide the core and recurring return, while buybacks provide additional flexibility when the balance sheet and investment profile allow. The objective is to deliver sustainable value creation and attractive total shareholder returns through the cycle. I will close by summarizing the financial targets that brings the strategy together. Our financial target framework for 2027, 2030 links growth, operating leverage, and disciplined cash conversion. The first target is 5%-8% annual industrial growth. The second target is at 17%-20% group EBITDA margin. The third target is 100% cash conversion of net profit. These targets are interdependent. Industrial growth expands the higher value part of the portfolio. Growth ahead of incremental cost growth creates the operating leverage. The positive mix improves the added value margin. Disciplined CapEx and working capital management supports cash conversion. Strong cash generation enable both reinvestment and shareholder returns. We believe that the progress already delivered demonstrates that our model is working, and the next phase is about scaling it with discipline. That concludes the financial framework. We are now happy to take your questions. I will hand back to the master of ceremony. Thank you, Jeroen and Olaf and Robert too. Our goal was to illustrate how we transformed into a focused industrial motion and control specialist, why we have chosen the four markets that we've chosen, how IB and IAC are positioned to benefit, and of course, how it translates into our financial ambition. I hope we achieved that goal, and with that, happy to take your questions. Martijn? Yes. Thank you. Martijn den Drijver, ABN AMRO. My first question, Joep, is for you. I'll do them one by one, please. In Q2, you did 18% normalized EBITDA margin. You have a target for new projects of 20% EBITDA margin. You have a goal for industrial growth, CAGR of 5%-8%. Let's say that the majority of that refers to volume. Normal companies in your sector would have a drop-through rate of at least 20%-25%. Can you run us through how you came to that 17%-20% range for your EBITDA? Yeah, with pleasure. The first remark is this is a target for the coming three and a half, four years. It's set in time. As I also try to indicate, the growth that we are laid out with 5%-8% is not a growth related to a top-down view of what the markets will support, but is grounded in the reality of the pipeline that we have today. One of the things that I think Olaf and Robert indicated is that pipeline has expanded specifically in IB quite rapidly over the past, say, year and a half, two years since Olaf has taken over. It will simply take some time to basically translate, but the expectation is if you were to say, "Okay, let's look at a slightly longer timeframe, let's take six years," that we'd be a lot more confident that we are going to hit that growth rate that is supported by the market segments that we've shown. It is almost a timing effect. The second part of your question was how it then drops through, but of course, that growth then translates into EBITDA margins, and they hang together. That's also related to the EBITDA. Just to follow up, basically what you are saying, these targets are really very much back-end loaded and not linear? Yeah. They are grounded in the reality of the current pipeline today. So it is a bottom-up assessment. Now, of course, there is the cycle, the economy, of course, has a big impact on that. But all other things being equal, we expect that over the coming years, this pipeline that we have seeded over the past couple of years is going to deliver substantial growth. Understood. My second question, even though, Jeroen, you talked about the ROI on one of your final slides, the least 14%, it is not any more part of your strategic targets. Can you elaborate on why that is? Yeah, I can. So basically, we are now at 26.3%. If you look at the definition that we have, excluding goodwill, which made sense at the time, I think, then that ROI at one point will approach 35%, 40% even. So it is not really a discriminator anymore for strategy or for action. So in our sense, it does not make real sense to maintain that as a financial target. We did include it now in the capital allocation framework, but then more importantly, for example, if you do M&A. Obviously the M&A needs to add value above your cost of capital, and we think that by targeting the 14%, we can make that hurdle. I get it. Two more, please. These are for Robert and Olaf. Can you talk about if you achieve these growth rates, how you are going to accommodate that from a capacity perspective? I visited your plants. Some are quite full. Obviously, you can add shifts, which has been suggested, but run us through what type of capacity constraints there are and how you are going to solve them, for each division, please. Yeah. Robert? Okay, I will start. Actually, let's say you run the factories according to the demand. But in our Romanian facilities are still room for expansion. Out of experience, we can more or less quick get new personnel on the market. We are known as a reliable and good employer there. We have a good name. We are also able to rather efficiently transfer production parts from Germany to Romania, if that makes sense. All these activities, we are continuously executing more or less. That is why no issue with capacity increase. Yeah. For the IB, we have a similar situation. There with no plan with three shifts so far. Means there is an all four plans capacity left, and also for the plans in Germany, especially one in the north, we started with more automation to get more capacity in. Therefore, if we see all the pipeline, we do not see an issue with the capacity so far. For the full period. And maybe one additional remark to make, certainly compared to the automotive world, the business of Robert and Olaf is not very capital intensive. So in a way, it is also easier to add capacity than it used to be from both practically but also financially. Having said that, if you look at, again, at the period we are talking about and probably a little bit beyond, if we hit the growth rates that we think we are going to hit, then we are fine according to capacity. Of course, at some point this will stop. But then the capital needed to accommodate that is not very large. Okay, understood. Then my final question is something about subjects that I missed. In the H1 2026 results presentation analyst meeting, you talked about, or you even mentioned rare earth free permanent magnets. I know I have not heard anything about that, would seem like a good idea. The other one that is missing, so to speak, defense. There must be applications where your mission-critical solutions can find its way. Can you please elaborate on both? So Olaf, why don't you start with the heavy rare earth-free brake, and then maybe Jeroen you take the defense part. Yeah. It's still a topic also for us, but I didn't bring it to the presentation today because there's a reason. We increased our stock level up to one year now for the magnets so that we can follow our customers. Of course, maybe there's a question, do we need two years? But then our customers will also run out of magnets. Therefore we came up with them, and they confirmed that we shall have a stock level of roughly one year, what we do have now. As we also talked about the heavy rare earth free. Yeah. Yeah. That's for the new solution. Then we said, "Okay, what we can do better?" Therefore we reduce the heavy earth in the new design. That then also the magnet that sells, this helps us also for the future. Yeah. It's not something that is going to make an impact in this current strategic period, or is that still a possibility? What do you mean with that? Well, could it be that you are now in some sort of R&D or thinking about it phase, eventually you might move to an R&D prototyping type phase, and then if there is probably acceptance. Could it be that eventually in 2028, 2029, this actually could lead to revenue, even though you haven't presented it yet today? Yeah. For the new design, they are already in the market suite sizes, so we will launch the other suite sizes end of this year. We already have pilot customers of that, but I did not spoke about that because we have NDAs with them. But it is a product they are highly interested in because they also see the advantage that we take out rare earth, especially the praseodymium. That is not in the new brake anymore. Understood. Thank you. Yes, I shall answer the defense question. Yes, we do have defense business, and in the past it was rather running under the radar because of low quantities and low numbers. Yes, of course, it is now more interesting, and it is also one of the reason why we had to increase capacity in the German plants. One more remark, if I may. There is other areas where we have not talked about. One very obvious one is humanoids, and this is purely related to the fact that we wanted to focus in Our pipeline has expanded so much, and there is so many examples of products that are going to be relevant for that coming four or five years. Defense is going to be relevant for sure. We are looking at it. It is a bit longer. Humanoids, who knows? But it is still something we are looking at very actively, to say, "Okay, because this is going to be packed with mission-critical stuff." You think about a humanoid of 80 kilograms running around serving you drinks. Now, when that happens and if that happens, I am not going to talk about, but we decided, well, let us not include that because it is going to be for sure in the 2030s, in our view. So there is more like that. Understood. Thank you. Yeah. Thank you for the presentation. Tijs Hollestelle, ING. I also want to talk a little bit about the end markets. I think we had the conversation on the past Capital Markets Day. If I take, let's say slide 12. You are basically providing some info about the servo motor market, $21 billion. I am always wondering, Kendrion is a small company, but relatively big in its field. I think later on in the presentation, there was some additional information that about 25%-30% of the servo motor concerns Kendrion products. That brings down the addressable market to EUR 5 billion-EUR 6 billion. Is that the right way to look at the market opportunity? No, that is very clever, but that is not. Just practical point, the most difficult part for us, in communicating the size of the opportunity, is to actually gauge what the size of the end market is we are in. You are right, the servo motor market, if you take it generically, and that is of course, done from a public source, is first of all, it is global, and it is probably including all sorts of applications that are not relevant for our brake. That is my guess. Then to say, "Okay, well, why don't you then present the market that is relevant?" Because that is simply not available, and it is extremely hard. It is sort of the way we think about all these markets is not so much the absolute number of how large it is, but what is the growth. Then it is the underlying assumption to say, okay, if the servo market is going to grow at 7%, I think it says on that slide. Then our part, to be honest, it's potentially even faster because it's so relevant for these high-end robots. But let's use the 7% as a proxy also for us to gauge h ow significant it can be and how much money we're going to invest in this. Yeah. Okay. That's clear. Directional, it's helpful and indeed, if I make a jump to the medical market, because I'm also trying to get more feel for the potential high growth scenarios. Let me see. On the medical market, I think there was a slide which was mentioning that you are having the three out of five of the large medical equipment suppliers, OEMs as your customer. Yeah. That's quite impressive, but then it raises the question from my side, on the full product line of these companies, because then these customers should be really big in your sales concentration. Because it was not that big, or is it for 1 of the 20 machines they're making that can only spec in in once? Yeah. Yeah, we are talking about one special application here, where we serve, let's say, most of the Western machinery. And then, of course, you have different product lines at those customers, and we are not in every product line. We have also competition. Jeroen? Yeah. Specific for the surgical robots. We are designed in at three of the biggest five. We are actually shipping to one, and it is indeed not 100%. You have a share of the revenue with a competitor. But of course, the one is sizable, has been growing rapidly. It is above EUR 1 million. If the other two come on top, plus part of the 10 that are in the offer that Olaf talked about, then it can be a nice, good market for us, and then we will definitely speak about it more. Yeah, and that is why you are talking about with quite a lot of confidence. Yes. About the pipeline. Yeah. Because it is not there, but you already are seeing it and preparing it. Basically, add on that, I am on the sell side, so I look at champagne scenarios. But if you, let us say, then get all five of them, then you suddenly have, in that specific area, 66% growth in two years. It is not impossible. Yeah, so last year we had 400% growth in that area. I like that. Yeah. Do not map that to the future. Yeah, well, you can open the champagne if you do, but, so yeah, the growth can be much higher than the 15% because, yeah, it is really ramping up. At the same time, it will not be like EUR 100 million market or something for us. So, yeah. Okay. My view is that this is now happening more at Kendrion. Yes. The organization is more hunting for these kind of opportunities Exactly. Compared to three, five years ago. Yeah. Both from a revenue perspective, it is interesting, because this is really taking off. But also from a margin perspective, you can imagine that it is much higher than bottom brakes for servo motors. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. But maybe one more remark on this to be helpful also. We have now talked about if you look at our current revenue, you say it is 50% in robotics automation, and then you have all these numbers, so you can see now that is currently the lay of the land. If you look at the slide that Jeroen presented, I think it is slide number 56, with that bottom-up growth forecast per segment. You see that there in medical, which is a relatively small part still of the overall group, is going to grow faster than the others. I think it was 14% or something like that. So that is another way of trying to get a feeling for how this is going to translate ultimately in our top line. Yeah. Thank you. I would like to add some more sentence, maybe this makes it clearer. This is really long cycle sale. When we speak about these three or five, this can take years. It is on one hand, it is a development time, this takes two or three years, but then you have to wait for the FDA approval also. The advantage is if you are in, you are in together with the entire advice. But the disadvantage is you have to wait a long time, and it is a long development time. Therefore, we must be serious with that, and we cannot open the champagne and say, "Oh yeah, we get the turnover the next year for that. Frank. Yes. Frank Claassen at the Growth Board again. On your revenue growth target of 5% to 8%, could you roughly elaborate how much you think will be pricing and how much will be volume? Anything to say on this? Yeah. Price will be between 1% and 1.5%. In that underlying assumption in our bottom plan is moderate inflationary environment. If that is not the case, as it is currently not, then another underlying assumption is that we will be able to pass on additional inflation in the prices as we have done in the past. It is also in many cases, we are contractually allowed to do so. Yeah, I think that answers. Yeah. You gave some number on the active business opportunities, on the pipeline, so to say. Can you say anything about, let's say, the average project size or maybe is there a minimum project size? Is there anything to give more on that? Yeah, it's good and difficult question. Robert and Olaf both. Yeah, we actually start to count it starting at EUR 20,000 per year, goes up to EUR 5 million. Yeah. Yeah, we start a little bit higher, I think as we are not so niche. It's roughly EUR 80,000, EUR 90,000 because otherwise we shift this kind of business to our distributors when it is too small. The smaller projects, we call that an also project, but this is maybe some adjustments. It's not so much to do, but it goes also where a project i s then a couple of hundred thousand also goes to the million. Frank, the law of the large numbers prevails too. So Olaf went from 100 to 200+. You can safely assume that the underlying average size of these projects hasn't really materially changed. So which also means if you double the number of projects, you expect that the growth will accelerate. Robert, similarly, and now he also has a larger number of projects normally. So that's also the growth of the pipeline is a proxy for what you can then expect down the line. It's a leading indicator for future growth. Okay, thank you. On the R&D expenses, how much is that roughly and does it grow or do you get more paid by the customers? What is the say on this? Yeah. So it's slightly over 6% for IAC, around 4% in IB. We expect that will increase with revenue, in line with revenue, because obviously also, the likes of AI can support existing R&D employees to be more effective. So we think we can keep it stable as a percentage of revenue, which is also in the plan. Do you see that customers are paying more than they used to for the R&D expenses or is it the same or? It is relatively stable. Okay, thank you. Any more questions? Good afternoon, gentlemen. My name is Hilco Wiersma from, long-term shareholder. We have a few questions. First of all, thank you for your clear presentations. Your dependency on Germany, it's more than 50% of your revenue in total. What do you expect for the coming years to come to 2030? The second question is about your content value per robot is increasing the last few years. You expect more robots to come. What do you expect about the value content per robot the coming years? A financial question for Jeroen. What is your definition for excess cash? Maybe you can clear it up. Yes. Can there be such a thing? Is that your question? First, Germany. If you look at the current layout of the company, as you're rightfully saying, we've presented that, we're quite German-centric, both in terms of our customers, our manufacturing locations, our employees. Barring M&A, I expect that to continue. Having said that, you also, I think it was Robert who mentioned it, that if you actually look at where the products end up, it's much more global than that. It can either be through direct export, but the bulk of this goes to international, multinational companies in Europe, Germany or otherwise, that then export this to other markets. If we do not find suitable M&A targets over the coming years, I think this will not materially change. M&A, of course, can tilt that playing field, and it could potentially be quite interesting for us to get a little bit more exposure in the U.S. Because if you think about robotics and automation, we have a presence, IB has a presence in Atlanta. Robert has a presence in Mishawaka. It could well be that that's an interesting opportunity for us, but always against the backdrop of the discipline that we have with pursuing it. It's not the goal in itself. Your second was on the value, the content of value that we have in the robots? Yes. My statement is, it's also related to the mission-critical nature of our products. It's always going to be quite modest. What is really, and I talked a bit about that, is if you look at the robotics market and you see these three trends, you see much more of it. You see more content because robots with every degree of freedom is fundamentally you need a brake. If you go from three to eight degrees of freedom, you almost triple the number of brakes and they become a lot more safety. They become a lot more. The performance needs to be much better because it's a safety application now, certainly when it interacts with humans. So you need more competent brakes, you need more of them, and you get more robots. In terms of our share of the overall system cost, I think is going to remain quite limited. In a way, that is what we like because that allows us, and Olaf talked a lot about that, to do this value-based pricing. It is not about EUR 0.10 or a euro, it is about the performance of the brake in a very expensive piece of machinery. That would be my, I do not know if you have any to add to that. Yeah. We have the big advantage that we are so well-known in the industrial robot business. They know us for years, and it is for the integrated brake business. The robotic is our main pillar. Now what we see is more and more we have the cobots inquiries. What I a little bit explained is different, but mainly they are the same OEMs here behind. We have the relationship, but now we have to design a brake in the envelope size. Industrial robots, they do not have this issue. This is, I would say, the future for us. It is a totally different kind of brake. I will show you that later, then you can see that. All the wiring we have to handle, and, yeah, we have to equip that in the envelope size. But the advantage coming back is we have the network for that. They speak with us and say, "Listen, what we can do in the future, how we can handle this, the cobot business?" Therefore, we are already in, but the volume will come later. Yeah. But this will be the future business for us because you will see a cobot with a human being in the future quite often. Yeah. Jeroen, excess cash. Yeah. I do not think there is an exact definition of excess cash because it also depends on opportunities to spend it, for example, M&A. I think it is safe to say, the way we talk about it, and I think I said it also in the presentation, as long as the leverage is at the low end of the range, which is one, where we currently are. Basically, all the cash that we generate in the company, we said that is, of course, what we can then distribute to the shareholders, what we actually have done this year. So EUR 18 million has been paid out in cash to the shareholders. If we generate EUR 20 million cash, there is no M&A, then we will pay that EUR 20 million back to the shareholder in one way or another, because there is no reason to deleverage further than one. One gives us plenty of opportunity to do M&A. That would be my definition of excess cash. One final question about the M&A targets pipeline. Can you give us a range, a size in terms of revenue? What do you think to acquire? Is it EUR 10 million or less? More? Yeah. If you look back, over the past 10 years, we have done two acquisitions, as you know. I would say INTORQ, and that is probably still valid. Was it somewhere around 50, I think, when we bought it. When it gets, it depends, of course, all on the multiple, et cetera, but we want high-quality businesses, so typically you would have to pay for that. To me, that is probably the practical upper limit. Now, if you find something that is extremely interesting, perhaps you can think about other way, but that would be my answer there. I want to reemphasize that it is a disciplined exercise. We get a lot of opportunities. There is a bunch of teasers floating around, has been over the past years. We always look at them, but first of all, it has to be adjacent to what we currently are. It needs to be mission-critical. We need the synergies to actually justify the premium, and it better not be some commercial synergy down the road, so quite hard synergies. Then there is the culture and the management team question. The fact, for instance, if you go back to INTORQ, also, we did well there because here's the INTORQ man running our entire brake business today. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. Martijn? Yeah. Martijn den Drijver for ABN AMRO again. More general question. You mentioned you're hunting more. You've changed your approach in terms of to go- to market. Has that led to any change in the incentives for both you, your salespeople, your marketing people? Can you elaborate on that? Yeah. For the incentives, it is a huge difference if you bring them together in one target system. Before they have different targets, they had a different bonus system, but now they have bonus and models together. They are one team. They are responsible to make it real. Yeah. But is it any different in terms of remuneration as part of their total salary package? Has that remained the same? It is just a difference in the way it is being calculated. Yeah. It is not that we add additional salary for that. We asked them, "Shall we change something? Shall we be more successful? Shall we go faster to the market?" And they agreed with that. Okay. Yeah. Martijn, if you are asking after if maybe the bonus percentage is larger than the base, is that what you are in there? Well, if you change things, people tend to run harder if they get more out of it. Yeah, true. I think that the step that has been made, and that is a very important one, given the current structure that we have, which certainly in Germany but also in the Netherlands, is not that easy to change. You have to do with all the unions, et cetera. Olaf has really aligned within the agile teams, as we call them, for these specific applications. The R&D, the project manager, and the sales guy who are all chasing a certain sub-segment, their bonuses schedules have been aligned, and at Kendrion US, that was not the case. Understood. My second question goes back to what I mentioned or asked about earlier, that capacity. You mentioned yourself, Joep, that additional CapEx is actually not that expensive. It's not very capital intensive. Yes. You've already gone to Eastern Europe. Why not do that more? Why not go further in terms of that reshoring yourself? Build up a new factory somewhere in Hungary, Romania, and instead of paying people in Germany, German wages to work through the evening and the night, move it to Eastern Europe. What would you say to that suggestion? Well, in many ways, I would say that's what we're doing. Now, you can always do more, don't get me wrong, but that's effectively what Robert and IAC with Sibiu, is doing on a continuous basis. Now, there's another dimension here, that is how automated is the production. In Robert's case, it's a lot of because they're smaller series. If you go to one of his factories, you see a lot of these U-shaped production. It's quite manual, and as soon as it becomes of a certain size and you need more people, then we move this type of production to Sibiu. We've done that for the past years. Now, you can always do more, but that's really the system we have. The IB is more automated, so it is less easy to justify, although never say never. Okay. Understood. Maybe can you just refresh our memory in terms of the competitive environment? Maybe for each of you, could you give your top three competitors, and what do you see at their level in terms of initiatives that could actually be a threat to both your current business model and maybe the targets that you've presented today? It's a rather broad question, I realize that. Olaf, do you want to start? Robert can think a bit. I don't really want to name here competitors because they also listen here to that. But the advantage what we have is not all of our competitors are in the same field. It means we have competitors, for example, in the robotic business, but they are not the same in the medical or they're not the same in the intralogistic. It means the advantage, and this is what I also want to point out, is due to the fact that Kendrion bought INTORQ. So they are really a supplier for integrated, non-integrated brakes, and this is quite rare on the market. There is only few worldwide who really can do it. Therefore, there is competition, but if you compare that, what I spoke about with several motor manufacturer, they're on totally different levels. Therefore, they are highly interested that we can reduce the price of the brake with technology because they are in a commodity business. We are not mainly in a commodity business. Yeah. Although, we've been in the past also in quarterly results, we do talk about some of these names. Regal Rexnord in the U.S. is huge. Regal Rexnord, they're probably by volume, I think, Olaf, the number one. Yeah. They bought some of the companies now, like in France, one, or they bought American one, Stearns, and one in England, therefore they have a big portfolio. But they are also a motor manufacturer. A motor manufacturer is also in competition with other motor manufacturer. That's also our advantage. Got it. They do not have the permanent magnet side of the house. In Germany, there are various companies that we bump into, all with their own strength. They are credible competitors. Because of the breadth of the product offering that we have, and we are expanding that, as you just heard, we have a very good reputation. As Olaf said, people know us. We are really one of the leading brake manufacturers in that field with the most complete product portfolio. For IAC? IAC basically tries to avoid one-to-one competition, because we are rather competing on technology. That results in a complete new design of product or even complete different technology. That is why it is sometimes difficult to address it directly to a certain competitor. We protect our developments, if we can, by patents. If not, we see that we at least own, or that we inherit a certain IP, which is difficult to copy. Yeah. Okay. Understood. Thank you. Also a follow-up question. Jeroen, we discussed it 2 minutes before the Capital Market Day started, but just to have it on tape, there is no, let's say, accounting-wise impact from the change in ownership of the mobility or the CBU plant on the last day of 2028? That is correct. The revenue that we have will continue and will continue to be reported as revenue in our P&L. The only thing, as we also talked about, what will change, is that when Knorr-Bremse takes over the manufacturing, so basically then our cost, which is now raw materials, direct labor, indirect labor, other operating expenses, when it moves, it will be only raw material cost because basically they make it for us. So there's a little bit difference in the structure, but the overall result is the same. Also the revenue will continue to be recorded in our books. Yeah. There are 190 FTEs allocated to mobility. Most of them are indirect, I guess, from the? Most of them are direct, but they will move to Knorr-Bremse. Yeah. But we will basically pay as part of the piece price that we buy from Knorr-Bremse. So the people will move. The physical setup, it is a separated production hall in CBU, but it is not integrated in Robert's production. It is separate, physically separate. That whole entity with the assets and the people will then transfer to Knorr-Bremse on that end of 2028. Yeah. Okay. I also had a couple of more questions on, let us say, the client structure. So you also mentioned customers in the offshore wind and onshore wind turbine makers. Do you have the big OEMs as the customer, Siemens and Vestas? Yeah. So we are in this market more than 20 years. Therefore, we are well known. So we, I would say we cover nearly the entire business with that. So that does not mean that we are on all wind turbines, but if we are not the first supplier, we are the second supplier for that. But we are really well known in the market, for both solutions. So for the pitch brake and also for the yaw drive brake. Do you also have Chinese turbine manufacturers as customer? Yes, but this we handed over to the Chinese company now because they have the local supply. All right? Yeah. Also there were some comments on the high voltage substations. Is the Dutch grid operator TenneT also a customer of Kendrion? Because they are now investing quite heavily in medium and high voltage substations. TenneT Germany and we are delivering the solenoid switch for these circuit breakers. We are not the supplier of the complete circuit breaker. We have to go via the usual companies, Siemens, ABB, Eaton. Again, it is a sub-component in a mission-critical product that then ultimately ends up owned by TenneT. Lastly, I think it is also for Robert Lewin, the fire door locks. Who do you sell that to? Is that door makers or building material wholesalers or construction companies? Yeah, usually the supply chain is organized, that you have a construction company who is buying that from a provider for the complete fire protection system. The fire protection system companies are Johnson Controls, Honeywell, Hekatron in Germany, and they all need that part from us. As I said, in the German-speaking countries, that is the so-called VdS standard, which you have to follow. Yeah, the certification here, Tijs Hollestelle, is extremely important, which is also why a builder would never on his own accord build a sprinkler installation and then try to get the certification. It is impossible. So they are specialized companies, and we are also certified, and we then sell that into the larger system. So your commercial guys and your engineers are educating the engineering firms and basically these fire safety companies who take care of a full building. Yeah. Actually, we have the complete door in-house, and the external auditor comes yearly to check if we follow the regulations in force and in quality and all that kind. It is very involved. This is not easy to do. Unless you already have done it like we have. Okay. Thank you. Any more questions? Is there any questions online? There is one question from the online audience, from Matthias Turner. He asks, "What is your historic conversion rate for the business pipelines in IB, and IAC respectively? Yeah. You guys want to talk a bit about that or just maybe on the bottom up, maybe we should talk a bit about when a project, at what type of weighting we enter it into the pipeline, just to try to be helpful. Yeah, I try to answer that. So what we take into account is 60% of probability and do then the weighting accordingly, and then we put it into the planning. That is a good leading indicator that 60% based on experience typically is what you then expect. So again, back to that bottom-up analysis of what we have in the pipeline, if something is at 60% and we think there's a 10 revenue in, then of course we weight it at six. As we go along, then hopefully it increases. Olaf, for you, similar? Yeah, so we start with the business opportunity, when we know there is really a feasibility that we can do it, that we know we are on the same level regarding pricing, and we know all the context of that. So these are all the leads. Really a business opportunity is when we come up with a solution, we have the first test on the customer side. So there's a second level, and then we are between 50% and 70% of probability. When we already send PPAP samples and there is real test and we speak about a ramp-up, then we will put that in the budget for the next year. Okay. Any more questions? No further questions. Okay. Any final thoughts? If not, then I thank you very much for your attention and for all the engaging questions. You are now invited to take a good look at all the different samples and products that we have here and of course, also for a drink. Thank you very much.